He calls for the creation of a new set of awards that he thinks would be more relevant, to be presented at a real convention (i.e. one that draws >50K people, I think) by real fans.
This sort of thing — if you think WSFS is wrong, go try it yourself — is exactly what people like me have been saying for years. As long as you don't use the name "Hugo Award" or any of WSFS's service marks (including the design of the trophy itself), nobody's stopping you from setting up awards that work the way you think they should work.
Mind you, I suspect that when he and his friends try to actually do the work, they'll discover it's a wee bit more difficult than they thought it was. After all, the Hugo Awards as they exist today did not spring fully-formed from the head of Milton Rothman at the 1953 Worldcon. They started haphazardly and in fits and spurts, and have evolved slowly — too slowly for some — over the years. As one of the directors of the non-profit corporation behind the SF & Fantasy Translation Awards as well as having been a past Worldcon chair and Hugo Awards administrator, I know better than most what a lot of the challenges are.
I'll be very surprised if they manage to make anything constructive happen, and if they do, I suspect that they'll end up re-inventing many of the forms that WSFS uses for the Hugo Awards, although they're likely to end up thinking that it's a New Idea and that nobody has ever had to deal with the issues before. But that certainly doesn't mean I'm opposed to them trying. As Bernard Peek said in one of the comments there, "If you are expecting any opposition from SMOFs then I’m afraid you are going to be disappointed."